QuoteReplyTopic: Turkish Professor: Muslims Discovered Ame Posted: 15-Dec-2006 at 15:37
Originally posted by Hellios
I said nothing about what you're writing so much about. I mentioned only this:
Originally posted by pinguin
To advance more....
And why do you laugh then?
For me it is a tragedy. If there was not a technological differency between the Americas and the Old World, the cruel Europeans wouln't have killed so many Native Americans as they did.
Look at the other places of the world. The muslims, Turks and China could not be invaded as easy because European were in inferior conditions, at least in the 15th century! Africa was spared because its contagious deseases killed more whites than any battle. Only the Americas was indefense against the European. And look at what they did!
So, I repeat the question, why do you laugh? It is funny?
...That's not entirely fair. You lump all native americans together but divide old world civilizations in separate cultures. If you say Greeks learned from Romans and Japanese from Chinese, you should also say that Aztecs learned from Toltecs, and Mayas from Olmecs.
Yes, you got a point in there. But the degree of isolation was greater in the Americas than in the old world. For one thing, the greatest civilizations were very distant each other, and there was almost no contact at all between them.
Let me give you an example, by the first century A.D., the horse was known almost everywhere in the old world, except for subsaharan Africa. Sheeps, goats and cows were also know by everyone. Mechanism, Iron and shipbuilding were also widespread.
In the Americas the llama, an animal that double as a fiber and meat provider, and a transport, was only know in Peru, together with hunging bridges and balsa rafts. While the techniques of chinanpas, writing and paper making were only known in Mexico. That was the main disadvantage for the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
The old world civilizations had an early start. The Americas were developing by themselves and advancing fast but were invaded. What would have happened if leaved alone? It's just speculation, but I believe they would have become integrated and progress would have accelerated to reach the same levels of development than the old world had achieved.
Do you get it? Don't you? Well, I repeat it once again?
NATIVE AMERICANS DIDN'T NEED TEACHERS
...plus this...
Originally posted by pinguin
To advance more, though, they (native Americans) need to develop abstract mathematics, axiomatic geometry, algebra, precision astronomy, alchemy, mechanical machinery, iron metalurgy and ship building. Topics that were underdeveloped at those times in the Americas. The Ancient Americas were about 2.000 years behind Eurasia in technology, that's for sure. Spaniards, after all, brough a real technological revolution to the Americas with the comming of the horse, cows (milk, chesses), wheet, rice, paper, alphabet writing, iron and the technologies of theirs times.
...equals:
It's a contradiction; one statement suggests native Americans were not lacking knowledge, and the other suggests the opposite.
Ok, how about (from another thread) this?:
Originally posted by pinguin
Athens (the origin of phylosophy and modern science)
Alexandria (The most sophisticated city of classical times)
Rome (What would one say about it? Superb! A city 1500 years ahead of its time, and the real origin of Western Civilization)
Cordoba (Al-Andalus capital, and starter of the European wake up)
Venice (Outstanding Middle Age's superpower)
Florence (Renacense)
London (Moden times superpower capital and the center of the industrial and scientific revolutions)
Tenochtitlan (The Aztec city; the most outstanding city in the New World)
Of all of them I believe the top one is Alexandria.
Originally posted by pinguin
If there was not a technological differency between the Americas and the Old World, the cruel Europeans wouln't have killed so many Native Americans as they did. Look at the other places of the world. The muslims, Turks and China could not be invaded as easy because European were in inferior conditions, at least in the 15th century! Africa was spared because its contagious deseases killed more whites than any battle. Only the Americas was indefense against the European. And look at what they did!
Interesting topic.
Originally posted by pinguin
So, I repeat the question, why do you laugh? It is funny?
"Native Americans didn't need teachers ... to develop the civilizations the world know today"
(Some people believe Amerindians were dumb that they need Hebrew, Chinese or Subsaharan peoples to teach them. The fact is they developed theirs civilizations alone)
"The ancient americas were about 2.000 years behind Eurasia... In certain critical techniques!"
(Nobody denies that! Now, everything the Amerindians had they have invented themselves. Is not the case of Spaniards that had to import instruments from Holland, swords from Italy, sailors from Portugal, and that used a writing system invented by the Hebrews and developed by the Romans, had a Palestinean religion, used Arab mathematics and Indian numerals, Chinese gunpowder, magnetic compasses, paper and had almost anything invented by themselves!!!)
I don't see the contradiction. If Americas weren't invaded, the Americans would have developed its own Greece, sooner or later.
Probably not, because one of the reasons for the Old World's greater/superior knowledge is that its "members" had the advantage of being able to complement & build on each other's knowledge to a greater extent. Old World = Europe, Asia, Africa (Egypt), etc.
Probably not, because one of the reasons for the Old World's greater/superior knowledge is that its "members" had the advantage of being able to complement & build on each other's knowledge to a greater extent. Old World = Europe, Asia, Africa (Egypt), etc.
Perhaps I may agree in some of your ideas. The reason for the Greek golden age of creativity is the conflict between different ways of reasoning, comming from all the civilizations of the old times, fighting against each other, and giving as a result phylosophy, abstract math and scientific though.
In the Americas the diversity of people was smaller. Regions such as Mesoamerica and Peru were relative uniform. At the times of the contact the only large state that existed was the Inca Empire. Both the Mayan and the Aztec civilization were microscopic in terms of territorial space, and could be better understood as city states and alliances rather than empires. The conflicts between large empires could have contributed to competition and to progress in some way we can't grasp as yet.
Even though, I tend to believe that given enough times the same developments could had happened in the Americas. There is nothing that the Greeks did that couldn't be replicated in other places; not even abstract maths.
However, even with those differences on development there were quite surprising things that were created by the native americans, and if they had a little bit more luck, perhaps they would have been able to reject the foreigners. In fact, some of the most "primitive" nations of the Americas defeated the Europeans addopting quickly horses, weapons and tactics. And by the 19th century, the new peoples of the Americas were strong enough to defeat Europeans in all the battlefields.
Perhaps I may agree in some of your ideas. The reason for the Greek golden age of creativity is the conflict between different ways of reasoning, comming from all the civilizations of the old times, fighting against each other, and giving as a result phylosophy, abstract math and scientific though.
In the Americas the diversity of people was smaller. Regions such as Mesoamerica and Peru were relative uniform. At the times of the contact the only large state that existed was the Inca Empire. Both the Mayan and the Aztec civilization were microscopic in terms of territorial space, and could be better understood as city states and alliances rather than empires.
Well put. I totally agree with you.
Originally posted by pinguin
The conflicts between large empires could have contributed to competition and to progress in some way we can't grasp as yet.
I think when an Empire was formed, 2 things happened: A) the various conquered kingdoms received knowledge from the conquerors, and B) the conquerors (the new empire) consolidated knowledge from all its new kingdoms. Not all empires were equally interested in this kind of exchange, and not all empires were equally able to innovate and/or develop newly acquired technologies. Some empires were also more inventive than others. Yes, the competition factor you mention also.
Originally posted by pinguin
Even though, I tend to believe that given enough times the same developments could had happened in the Americas. There is nothing that the Greeks did that couldn't be replicated in other places; not even abstract maths.
I think it's like you said. Like this:
Originally posted by pinguin
The reason for the Greek golden age of creativity is the conflict between different ways of reasoning, comming from all the civilizations of the old times, fighting against each other, and giving as a result phylosophy, abstract math and scientific though.
In the Americas the diversity of people was smaller. Regions such as Mesoamerica and Peru were relative uniform. At the times of the contact the only large state that existed was the Inca Empire. Both the Mayan and the Aztec civilization were microscopic in terms of territorial space, and could be better understood as city states and alliances rather than empires.
This (below) is a very interesting topic, Pinguin. Open a new thread about this I will right now.
Originally posted by pinguin
However, even with those differences on development there were quite surprising things that were created by the native americans, and if they had a little bit more luck, perhaps they would have been able to reject the foreigners. In fact, some of the most "primitive" nations of the Americas defeated the Europeans addopting quickly horses, weapons and tactics. And by the 19th century, the new peoples of the Americas were strong enough to defeat Europeans in all the battlefields.
From people and historians i have met from SAmerica the ties between them and teh old world in particular the Hellens or Greeks is common ground. It does not attract historians much because of few fragmented evidences. The appearance of a Egyptian or Cycladic influence is highly likely. Recent discoveries of Bows similar to those used by Greeks helps to only ratify what we already knew from the other pieces of evidence. However, the question again should not be who discovered SAmerica because the bottom line is that the World was already known to the advanced civilisations of the world like China, Grecce, Byzantium, Egypt and many more. The claims made like who sialed passed the Mediteranean first and who walked over the Steppes first etc.. are all signs of immaturity and prove the instituted ignorance of teh people making their claims. This is why Greeks have made no claims, others make them on their behalf....for one the official websites fo many Samerican Nations claim some form of herritage to Greece. Greeks nor Greece makes th e claim.
Yes, but the Greek and classical heritage came to South America carried by the Spaniards. It didn't exist in here before the invasion. Spaniards of the time live in a world where Greek-Roman mentality was still important (they believe they were Romans in some sense). When Spaniards founded the first universities in the Americas, the ancient though spread to all people. The Catholic church is also very Roman in its culture, so that helped too. If you read a classic of the time, like La Araucana of Alonzo de Ercilla, you will realize the classical world was alive and well in the 15th century.
What existed, at least were I live, were native cultures being influenced by Inca imperialism, and a cosmological mentality that has more in common with the Celts than with the Greek Phylosophers.
The idea of trans-oceanic contacts is the one that is wrong. They didn't existed.
How come and the native americans where never in Favour of writting. I mean Inkas didn't have alphabet, and also the Indians.
Probably when the people who reached them riding the dolphins forgot to bring with them handscripts.
You are absolutely wrong!
Although Natives Americans in general (Indians live in India, don't forget) didn't have writing, there were some people that wrote quite a lot!
Maya writing has allow historians to recontruct the mayan dinasties to the smallest details, and we are talking of events that happened circa the 7th century A.D., 8 centuries before the invasion.
Incas didn't have writing but they have quipos to preserve theirs records. When the Spaniards arrived events since the 12th century could be put on writting and are well preserved for curious to look at.
Writing was invented several times in the history of man, in Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, Easter Island, and some other places. The alphabet is another issue completely. The alphabet was invented only once in human history by semitic peoples, probably Phoenicians, Hebrews or Canaaneans. So, it is not fair to ask amerindians to invent the alphabet when people like the chineses didn't figure it out either.
[q]
Yes, but the Greek and classical heritage came to South America carried by the Spaniards. It didn't exist in here before the invasion.[/q]
This statement is very wrong. The Spaniards re-colonised the Americas.
You are by this statement understimating both S Americans of whom also traveled to and from SA to Greece (Old World) at various points in their civilisations existance. Needless to say the fact that the Aztec Pyramids exist and that various other finds mimic or are a proto type for other pyramids found only in Old World cultures like those in Greece, Ptolemaic Egypt, Aztecs and so forth all suggest a contact point. The lack of such structures in CHina means they were not CHinese, The lack of similar pyramids in India also suggests they were not Indians. The Greek Pyramids (possibly used for storage and much much smaller) had similar design to those found in A America. This is something you can not overlook in your investigation. The pyramids i speak of are rare but dotted in different parts of the Hellenic world. However, how and why the obvious morphology of Americans is unique and represents parts of Egypt, India, CHina and Greece is that perhaps all had an impact on the region.
I think Asian influences were the last before the re-colonisation by Spaniards. I do not beleive they are a different category seperate from th e ones we traditionally know of as European, Asian, Negro (European, Asian, Lybian according to the ancient Greeks who called the blacks Lybians.)
... This statement is very wrong. The Spaniards re-colonised the Americas.
You are by this statement understimating both S Americans of whom also traveled to and from SA to Greece (Old World) at various points in their civilisations existance. Needless to say the fact that the Aztec Pyramids exist and that various other finds mimic or are a proto type for other pyramids found only in Old World cultures like those in Greece, Ptolemaic Egypt, Aztecs and so forth all suggest a contact point. The lack of such structures in CHina means they were not CHinese, The lack of similar pyramids in India also suggests they were not Indians. The Greek Pyramids (possibly used for storage and much much smaller) had similar design to those found in A America. This is something you can not overlook in your investigation. The pyramids i speak of are rare but dotted in different parts of the Hellenic world. However, how and why the obvious morphology of Americans is unique and represents parts of Egypt, India, CHina and Greece is that perhaps all had an impact on the region.
I think Asian influences were the last before the re-colonisation by Spaniards. I do not beleive they are a different category seperate from th e ones we traditionally know of as European, Asian, Negro (European, Asian, Lybian according to the ancient Greeks who called the blacks Lybians.)
To what kind of religion do you belong?
Let me guess: Mormonism, New Age, Afrocentrism?
Anyways, I believe this site is for serious discussing of historical events,
For fantasies you can go to the "Disney Channel group", or to the "Van Danniken forum". Simple.
Let's read some of your phrases:
"Needless to say the fact that the Aztec Pyramids exist and that various other finds mimic or are a proto type for other pyramids found only in Old World cultures like those in Greece, Ptolemaic Egypt, Aztecs and so forth all suggest a contact point"
Well, if you don't have imagination than could be suggested. To me, and to many other the design of a pyramid is "suggested" by a simple natural formation: hills. Most ancient cosmologies attributed to hills some supernatural properties, and several rituals were done in there, and it is quite easy to see than when people were far away from hills they build ARTIFICIAL MOUNTAINS. That's all what pyramids are.
If you want to follow the obsolete ideas of hyperdifussionism is your choice, but if so you need proofs, not just rethoric, to justify them.
Well, he is a very intelligent Sambo (Afro-Indigenous) individual then, who made his fortune saling fantasies to the right ethnic group.
I bet, he doesn't believe his hypothesis himself.
Penguin
Pinguin, try to use more respectable language!!
Sincerely, what's the problem?
The word "Sambo" is of common use in Latin America and mean Afro-Indigenous, a person that has Amerindian and African ancestors. That's the root of Brazilian "Samba", for instance.
If that's the reason of the complain, I apologize for it and I will replace that word for Afro-Indigenous in further posts.
Now, if the complain is for saying that Van Sertima sell fantasies; well, that is what he sales. Moreover, those fantasies are offensive againts Native Americans.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum